I was because Bryan Fuller was at the helm. But he's apparently left. Sooooo... I am not so sure anymore. I really thought Bryan's vision would be the tipping point.

I'll still watch it but now with a lot more reluctance.

@GrandTardigrade said:

Call me a purest, elitist, or whatever else, but I do have my reasons; I'm not a huge fan of the new movie reboots. My question here is for those that agree with me. Are you excited for this new TV show? Why or why not?

Definitely excited. I think the Trek is a much bigger idea than any single story line. I think it represents the expanse of human imagination and so the bigger the Trek universe, the greater my confidence in mankind's ability to progress.

So long as we Trek on I think we are in good shape.

Too heavy??

Not too heavy, I like thinking about things I just hope that they focus on themes like humanism, unity, thoughtful peace, inclusion, exploration, curiosity, and advancement for the greater good. Much of these were diminished in the reboot movies. I understand it's hard to do in a 2 hour movie what you can do in an episodic multi-year show, but these concepts are what make Star Trek so great to me. Hoping to see them come back strong in the new series.

@GrandTardigrade said:

Not too heavy, I like thinking about things I just hope that they focus on themes like humanism, unity, thoughtful peace, inclusion, exploration, curiosity, and advancement for the greater good. Much of these were diminished in the reboot movies. I understand it's hard to do in a 2 hour movie what you can do in an episodic multi-year show, but these concepts are what make Star Trek so great to me. Hoping to see them come back strong in the new series.

100% with you on that. Be a bummer if they went the vanilla action route like they did with the reboot.

Not interested anymore. Stopped watching Enterprise about 5 episodes in. New movies stink. New show sounds limp and there's no way I'm paying for it. The show runners are severely unimpressive. I'm not even interested in pirating it.

I still watch Tos and NG quite often. DS9 and Voy were not good enough for a 2nd watch but had decent moments. I don't regret watching them.

I won't pay extra to watch it. I already pay too much for TV every month.

If it's not good enough to cover the expense of production on a regular network TV channel or SciFi channel (or the like) without having to charge extra for viewers, then it cannot be worth watching. It's not like a Trek show wouldn't have a leg up on other shows with it's HUGE fan base. Maybe they think Trek fans will blindly pay extra just because it's a Trek show?

@Horus Mazinga said:

Not interested anymore. Stopped watching Enterprise about 5 episodes in. New movies stink. New show sounds limp and there's no way I'm paying for it. The show runners are severely unimpressive. I'm not even interested in pirating it.

I still watch Tos and NG quite often. DS9 and Voy were not good enough for a 2nd watch but had decent moments. I don't regret watching them.

Enterprise was a bit bit straight lace at the start, the temporal war was boring. But you should watch all the seasons, as there are some great episodes, anything which the Doctor was great and that blue alien. The romance between T'Pol & Trip. T'Pol had some great episodes that add a lot to the Vulcan history. Also the origin of "Red Alert" is explained. Towards the end when they knew the show was being cancelled they went all out, nothing to loose. The best episode ever of Enterprise is 'In a Mirror, Darkly' Watch Enterprise a few times and you will see it wasn't bad, I'd say due to the originality & what it added to the ST history, it easy beats Voyager.

As imperfect as All the Star Trek series and movies have been, they have ALL attempted to imagine a future for mankind. I am excited to see this new Star Trek Series, yes...I will pay for it. I hope they keep the depth and complexity of DS9 (I consider this the BEST) When Kirk and Co took the bridge there was diversity...at least a longing for it... this new show MUST take us past our stupid foibles and insecurities. With the current number of possible life forms out there it seems obvious to me we WILL encounter, hermaphrodites , asexual beings and it high time we dropped our quaint notions of sexuality. Lets's "...boldly go..."

@GrandTardigrade said:

Call me a purest, elitist, or whatever else, but I do have my reasons; I'm not a huge fan of the new movie reboots. My question here is for those that agree with me. Are you excited for this new TV show? Why or why not?

I'm right with you there. I'm not a fan of reboots in general. Why attempt to remake a classic? I have, however, loved nearly all of the Star Trek spin-offs, and I already know I'm going to love this one. What sold me? Four words: Jason Isaacs, Michelle Yeoh.

I only found out about it just now when a trailer happened to cross my line of sight, and I'm already extremely excited. I've been waiting for a worthy entry in the Star Trek universe for 12 years.

Nope. Saw the trailer and the visual style is all J J Abrams. It's very focused on Klingons vs. Federation, so I expect lots of action and little that made Trek Trek. Apparently, also, white males are relegated to helmsmen only, where we apparently belong. I normally try not to be so sensitive, but this cast really seems designed by committee and to be the anti-testosterone inverse of TOS. Guess I'll wait for the reviews.

Looks interesting. Great visuals. If the crew seem reasonably likeable and there is some chemistry it should bode well.

@Thespear said:

As imperfect as All the Star Trek series and movies have been, they have ALL attempted to imagine a future for mankind. I am excited to see this new Star Trek Series, yes...I will pay for it. I hope they keep the depth and complexity of DS9 (I consider this the BEST) When Kirk and Co took the bridge there was diversity...at least a longing for it... this new show MUST take us past our stupid foibles and insecurities. With the current number of possible life forms out there it seems obvious to me we WILL encounter, hermaphrodites , asexual beings and it high time we dropped our quaint notions of sexuality. Lets's "...boldly go..."

If we do encounter such beings, that still doesn't mean that what's normal FOR THEM, therefore should or must become normal for any other beings. Especially not with some kind of force of law, which is essentially "at gunpoint."

Enterprise had an episode with a race that required 3 individuals for reproduction. Is it your position that humans must do the same, otherwise we're "backwards," "unenlightened," even somehow "oppressive" in some way that nobody even imagined before that?

Dr Phlox's race practiced a kind of polygamy/polyandry, where each male had 3 wives and each female had 3 husbands. But that was normal FOR THEM. Do humans again have to do the same, or we're "in the dark ages?" And what about that other race that only used THREE individuals? Are we supposed to force them to "catch up" with us and the Denobulans?

What if there's some other race that has even more genders? What do we do then, start performing surgery on ourselves to fit in with THEIR normal, so they don't feel like we're somehow oppressing them by being different?

And what about the Borg? If we don't start turning ourselves into drones and flying around in giant cubes, aren't we insulting THEM?

That's the whole point of "boldly going..."! Not simply to stick our collective_ 'heads in the sand'_ and make pronouncements about what is "normal" and what is not. Look, I am not advocating the we, humans, earth dwellers or any other beings, copy or follow or accept any other specie's norms they might encounter in space. However take a look at the 'known' universe and compare it to our own tiny solar system, of which, we are reasonably certain there are no other similar corporeal beings like ourselves around. My question to you is twofold: a) how likely is it that somewhere in the vast expanse of the universe there are many other sentient beings? and b) how likely is it that these others beings are going to be different from us?

I think that it is almost certain that there ARE other beings and is is also almost equally certain that there are both more **advanced and less advanced **species than are own ( and maybe some other humanoid beings of similar advancement). The mathematical odds of none of these being true and that we, humans, are the ONLY or the MOST sentient being in the ENTIRE universe is beyond astronomical.

So perhaps we should start to forget about the word "normal" because it simply describes what we are used to. Given the almost certainty space exploration will bring, what we are used to may NOT be very SIGNIFICANT to the big picture at all! Perhaps viewing the small degree of diversity which Star Trek has ALWAYS tried to suggest is a suitable baby step for what lies ahead for mankind!

But that's not the point I think others make, and that I was countering. Some people seem to use Star Trek and the idea that there might be asexual or the 3-individual-breeding species or the Phlox-type species from Enterprise, somewhere in the universe, as saying something about Earth humans. But it really doesn't. Those things, if found, would be normal for them, but that doesn't say or prove anything about how Earth humans should behave. (If Earth humans decide to be "asexual," they don't reproduce. Because while some aliens elsewhere in the universe might reproduce asexually, humans don't, and can't.) And indeed, the 3-individual species wasn't taking any "tolerance" talk from Tripp or Archer about how THEY should be change their ways, and Phlox and his people weren't going to listen to anyone about how they shouldn't be so specific (or rigid) in THEIR arrangements. But I suppose the people who want to use Star Trek to pursue THEIR agenda, either don't notice that, or just ignore it. Which is a pity. There is a lesson they COULD learn, but instead they seem determined to invent something that doesn't really apply.

Yes, I can see how you may view some people as trying to use the diversity of Star Trek to further their agendas. The point I am trying to make though is that it is very likely that with our first encounter with genuine aliens, such notions of agendas will likely disappear very quickly. I am talking about 'real first contacts' not fictional depictions of human like aliens whether they are meant to push a cause or not!